Utopia, such as one seen in Brave New World

[Uther]

It would help this topic if you have read Huxley's book.

Basically, it's about this odd type of society, where everyone is happy. It's structured much like insect societies (bees and ant kingdoms).
People there are carefully developed in special glass bottles and born in 'birthing centers'. They are divided into strict castes and conditioned from the very start to like their role in society.
The castes are Alphas (leaders and operators), Betas (right under Alphas, these ones fill laboratories and factories), Gammas (lower yet), Deltas, and Epsilons (morons bred for incredibly mundane tasks such as carrying stuff).

So, if you were born an Epsilon you would have been purposely made dumber than the rest, and conditioned in a way which would make you enjoy doing your ****ty job. You would not feel betrayed by society, because your very perception would be molded by it. Same goes for every other class, really. Alphas and Betas are really the only ones who seem to sometimes regret their decisions, but then there is always soma (a legal drug distributed by government which basically puts recipient in a state of bliss and ecstasy, with very few side effects).

It's very unsettling read, but still interesting. They sacrifice many human qualities for happiness, and it's all detailed near the end of the book when "the savage" talks with Mustafa Mond.
Their society seems to work flawlessly on the surface, although i imagine such a society could never recover after some disaster which would kill a significant portion of alpha class. They trade adaptability for smooth functioning.

 

[Rujasu]

It takes a single person who has an independent thought to damage the society.

 

[The Elusive Mr. Hunt]

Not in the book it doesnt. iirc the main character is quietly assigned to some remote outpost.

 

[Selothi]

Yeah, a friend of mine liked it very much, haven't got around to reading it myself.

I know Orwell's "1984" has a lot in common with it, both being dystopias in a way, 'cept that there isn't any of the birthing and mind modifying, it's rather all done by propaganda from day one so that normal human beings are conditioned to think in a certain way, and there's a similar caste system: the proles, the dregs basically, the desk-jokeys as I understand it, and those at the top who actually know what's going on.

It's always an interesting read as it has sort of been tried, 'cept that without modifying human nature, it's impossible to create. Huxley solved that problem at least, 1984 didn't.

In any case, utopias are funny.

 

[Archonsod]

Their society seems to work flawlessly on the surface, although i imagine such a society could never recover after some disaster which would kill a significant portion of alpha class. It's not flexible at all.

Depends on how closely modelled on an insect hive it is. Kill the queen bee and the workers mate with the drones to birth a new queen. Presumably a similar recovery could happen; kill the alpha's and you just have the beta's make more alpha's. The lack of flexibility is actually it's strength; because everyone has a job to do from birth, and in the absence of anything else will continue to do that job, society continues largely unaffected. In Huxley's case, it just means everything will carry on the way it was pre-disaster until sufficient alpha's are created to shift it around again.

there's a similar caste system: the proles, the dregs basically, the desk-jokeys as I understand it, and those at the top who actually know what's going on.

Orwell's is class based, not caste. The Party are the leadership or basically the upper class, the proles are the lower classes and the dregs are the underclass (in fact, in 1984 the dregs are those who have rejected the leadership of the party and technically are no longer part of the same society as everyone else). There's movement between the classes in either direction, so it's not strictly true to call it a caste system.

It's always an interesting read as it has sort of been tried, 'cept that without modifying human nature, it's impossible to create. Huxley solved that problem at least, 1984 didn't.

It hasn't been tried. 1984 was Orwell taking Stalinism to it's logical extreme. Even Stalin wasn't that ambitious, or insane, delete as appropriate. It's perfectly possible to create and maintain such a society without altering human nature; indeed the regime such as it is in 1984 depends upon human nature to maintain power; it's what's so scary about it. The real impossibility would be finding a dictatorship which was that smart. Though of course, one of the possibly unintentional facets of 1984 as Orwell presents it is we may very well be living under such a regime right now, and simply not recognise it as such.

 

[FrisianDude]

Orwell's is class based, not caste. The Party are the leadership or basically the upper class, the proles are the lower classes and the dregs are the underclass (in fact, in 1984 the dregs are those who have rejected the leadership of the party and technically are no longer part of the same society as everyone else). There's movement between the classes in either direction, so it's not strictly true to call it a caste system.

Err, that's now how I remember 1984. I distinctly remembering there being a piramid of Big Brother > Inner Party > Outer Party> Proles.

 

[Archonsod]

Yes. You are familiar with the idea of social classes I take it? And the idea of class war espoused by Marx and Lenin?

 

[Selothi]

Could you give me the difference between caste and class ? I kind of regard them as the same thing ...

And, while it was an idea of communism taken to the extreme, I doubt a scenario such as Orwell's is ever going to be possible. Not unless we nuke ourselves and start over. Too many valors ingrained within society and people that can't just be taken away like that. Sure, if you followed a specific course of action relentlessly and for decades on a world-wide scale, you could end up re-writing everything society is, but that's like ... not going to happen.

But there are undeniable similarities between 1984 and today's world, and I agree that that's ****ing scary.

 

[Taimat396]

A caste is what you are. I'f you're born a merchant, you die a merchant. Born a pauper? Start looking for a big shoebox when you get old.

Classes are where you fit in. You get a lucky break, you can go up. Get screwed over badly enough, you go down.


As for the whole 'cant happen' thing - Hitler. Tell people something for long enough and they'll believe it.

 

[Uther]

Another apparent negative of Huxley's world is the purposeful stall of scientific progress.
Like Mond said in the end, science was closely controlled so that no more revolutionary discoveries could be made. They were content with what they had, and a big discovery could cause instability and ultimately ruin.

Depends on how closely modelled on an insect hive it is. Kill the queen bee and the workers mate with the drones to birth a new queen. Presumably a similar recovery could happen; kill the alpha's and you just have the beta's make more alpha's. The lack of flexibility is actually it's strength; because everyone has a job to do from birth, and in the absence of anything else will continue to do that job, society continues largely unaffected. In Huxley's case, it just means everything will carry on the way it was pre-disaster until sufficient alpha's are created to shift it around again.

It would take time for new alphas to mature, and frankly these people (beta, gammas, etc) would be completely incapable if the technology they rely on was destroyed. They are genetically designed to lack ingenuity, and if their technology couldn't prevent some large scale disaster from happening, they would be in a world of ****. While modern society doesn't work quite as smooth, at least every joe has a potential to turn things around.

 

[Archonsod]

Could you give me the difference between caste and class ? I kind of regard them as the same thing ...

You could just check wiki

In short, a caste tends to be a combination of socio-economic group, occupation or type of occupation and political status. For example Warrior caste indicates someone is a soldier, Priest caste a priest and so forth. Class on the other hand is generally a measure of an individual's economic and social standing only, with flexible definitions depending on their society - in 1900 Britain earning more than twenty grand a year would put you in the upper classes, by the 1990's the same wage would be working class.

And, while it was an idea of communism taken to the extreme, I doubt a scenario such as Orwell's is ever going to be possible. Not unless we nuke ourselves and start over. Too many valors ingrained within society and people that can't just be taken away like that. Sure, if you followed a specific course of action relentlessly and for decades on a world-wide scale, you could end up re-writing everything society is, but that's like ... not going to happen.

You underestimate just how much control Big Brother had. In the first case, forget anything you think you know about society, because big brother has rewritten the history books and continues to do so. In the second, remember that Big Brother constantly watches and observes, and anyone questioning the status quo tends to vanish rather quickly. Thirdly, Big Brother has organised your daily activities for you, so the time you get to actually do anything not mandated and rubber stamped by Big Brother is incredibly limited, and fourth Big Brother also offers rewards to any citizen reporting suspicious behaviour of his fellow citizens, so I wouldn't go trusting any suspiciously like minded people you happen to meet. Fifth, the government has also torn up the dictionary and has a list of words you may use, and those you may not. Naturally, the approved words make it incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to communicate ideas and concepts such as "Lets overthrow Big Brother", "Freedom", "My life sucks", "lets have sex".
But then you get the kicker. Big Brother knows some individuals will resent and rebel against this control. He expects you'll form revolutionary cells and conspiracies, so Big Brother provides those cells and conspiracies so you don't have to. All of the criminal activity, the conspiracies and everything else in the world of 1984 are actually formulated by Big Brother as a kind of social release valve to catch those who aren't completely happy with the regime. Big Brother doesn't simply run a totalitarian state, it also organises your entire life down to what you will be doing from minute to minute.

It's what I mean about a smart dictatorship. Big Brother doesn't just use near constant observation to prevent rebellion, he eliminates it as a concept in the first place. By destroying the history, culture and language and replacing it with his own the people are kept in thrall because they quite literally do not know any better.

As for getting there you'd be surprised how little it would take. The only thing the North Korean government lack for example is the ability to keep the people under constant observation. They've got everything else though.

It would take time for new alphas to mature, and frankly these people (beta, gammas, etc) would be completely incapable if the technology they rely on was destroyed. They are genetically designed to lack ingenuity, and if their technology couldn't prevent some large scale disaster from happening, they would be in a world of ****. While modern society doesn't work quite as smooth, at least every joe has a potential to turn things around.

Yes, but then you're talking about more than simply wiping out the alpha's, you're talking about destroying the hive. The difference between the two societies is stability. Wipe out the government in modern society and you get anarchy. Wipe out the government in a hive and things continue to tick along until it's replaced. We're more flexible because we retain some measure of independent action and ingenuity, however in order to retain that we need some form of control or governance. Huxley's people are the opposite; they can do fine without governance, but they lack flexibility. As nature shows, either society is a viable one, they just tend to thrive under different conditions.

 

[Uther]

snip

Yeah, i sort of assumed destruction of technology could very well occur with said disaster.
I think the biggest sacrifice Ford has made in this book was trading human adaptability for excelling in just 1 small area, thus reducing suffering but (imo) making society less resilient.
Alphas are the only adaptable ones, and even then only to an extent (they are not free from conditioning).

 

[FrisianDude]

Yes. You are familiar with the idea of social classes I take it? And the idea of class war espoused by Marx and Lenin?

Yes, I am. You were right in that post, I was simply saying that you used the wrong terms for the party & proles.

 

[Swadius 2.0]

隐藏

It would help this topic if you have read Huxley's book.

Basically, it's about this odd type of society, where everyone is happy. It's structured much like insect societies (bees and ant kingdoms).
People there are carefully developed in special glass bottles and born in 'birthing centers'. They are divided into strict castes and conditioned from the very start to like their role in society.
The castes are Alphas (leaders and operators), Betas (right under Alphas, these ones fill laboratories and factories), Gammas (lower yet), Deltas, and Epsilons (morons bred for incredibly mundane tasks such as carrying stuff).

So, if you were born an Epsilon you would have been purposely made dumber than the rest, and conditioned in a way which would make you enjoy doing your ****ty job. You would not feel betrayed by society, because your very perception would be molded by it. Same goes for every other class, really. Alphas and Betas are really the only ones who seem to sometimes regret their decisions, but then there is always soma (a legal drug distributed by government which basically puts recipient in a state of bliss and ecstasy, with very few side effects).

It's very unsettling read, but still interesting. They sacrifice many human qualities for happiness, and it's all detailed near the end of the book when "the savage" talks with Mustafa Mond.
Their society seems to work flawlessly on the surface, although i imagine such a society could never recover after some disaster which would kill a significant portion of alpha class. They trade adaptability for smooth functioning.

Everything below the Alphas, and possibly even the betas if some of them get above level conditioning, are not humans. They are little more than robots.  The society has traded in it's arts for brutal efficiency.

 

[The Elusive Mr. Hunt]

@Selothi, actually I believe there was nuclear war prior to the events of 1984. Its mentioned in Goldstein's book, iirc.

 

[Gule]

Haven't read the book, I have read 1984 though. Such books are interesting but I can sometimes find they make em angry and frustrated, like I would be if I was one of the characters. Regarding utopias I think the society we live in is about as close to utopia as you can come.